.
Geodätische Referenzrahmen bilden das unsichtbare, unverzichtbare Fundament für moderne Satellitennavigation, Geodaten, Landvermessung sowie die präzise Überwachung globaler Umweltveränderungen wie Meeresspiegelanstieg und Gletscherschwund. Dieser Vortrag beleuchtet das Zusammenspiel globaler geodätischer Beobachtungsverfahren (GNSS, SLR, VLBI, DORIS) und zeigt auf, wie Wissenschaft und Politik über Organisationen wie die International Association of Geodesy (IAG), das Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS) sowie das UN Global Geodetic Centre of Excellence (UN-GGCE) zusammenwirken, um diese kritische Basisinfrastruktur nachhaltig zu sichern. Darüber hinaus wird dargestellt, wie Österreich durch das Bundesamt für Eich- und Vermessungswesen (BEV), hochpräzise Observatorien wie Graz-Lustbühel und internationale Leitungsfunktionen in IAG und GGOS aktiv zur globalen Erdbeobachtung und Wissenschaftskommunikation beiträgt.
Der Fokus der Digitalisierung liegt zunehmend auf der Umsetzung vollständig digitaler Transaktionen. Beschleunigt wird diese Entwicklung durch gesetzliche Vorgaben wie z. B. die Pflicht zur Einführung der elektronischen Akte und des Onlineangebots aller digital abbildbaren Behördenleistungen für die öffentliche Verwaltung. Die eIDAS- Verordnung schuf hierzu einen einheitlichen regulatorischen wie technischen Rahmen vertrauenswürdiger Digitalisierung in Europa. Die Digitalisierung papierner Aufzeichnungen sind der Schlüssel für vollständige digitale Transaktionen. Mit der TR-RESISCAN des BSI liegt ein etablierter, in Verwaltung und Wirtschaft eingesetzter Standard zum rechtssicheren ersetzenden Scannen vor. Im Zusammenspiel mit Geschäftsanwendungen, Vertrauensdiensten und Bewahrung werden so medienbruchfreie elektronische Prozesse ermöglicht. Der Beitrag stellt, basierend auf den regulatorischen Vorgaben, konkrete Lösungen und Handlungshilfen zur Umsetzung vor.
Main text At its meeting in October 2014, the EURAMET TC for Length, decided upon a key comparison on the calibration of diameter gauges, named EURAMET.L-K4.2015. Twenty National Metrology Institutes and one Designated Institute from Europe, Asia and South America participated in this comparison, which was carried out in two parallel groups. Twelve laboratories from EURAMET participated in group 1, while ten laboratories from EURAMET and two laboratories from GULFMET and SIM participated in group 2. To provide the link three laboratories, CEM, INRIM and METAS, participated in both groups and in the key comparison CCL-K4.2015. Two sets of gauges consisting of two rings, two plugs and a sphere were circulated in parallel in the two groups, the circulation started in November 2016 and completed in February 2018. The reference value (KCRV) was calculated on a gauge-per-gauge basis as the weighted mean of the submitted results of the diameter, roundness and straightness measurements. With group 1, inconsistent results (En> 1) gave a number of 5 out of 60 independent results for diameter and 7 out of 77 for roundness, while with group 2 a number of 6 out of 59 for diameter. These numbers are reflected in the comparison with reference values, while it is worth noting that with the two plugs of 100 mm diameter a decrement of 2 inconsistent results is achieved by introducing an uncertainty contribution related to the apparent change of length of these gauges. Furthermore, the KCRV was calculated by linking the two groups for the diameter of all the twin gauges and for the roundness of the twin spheres. When compared to those calculated independently for each group, minor changes of the KCRVs and associated uncertainties are observed from linking the groups. Consistency checks are satisfied for most of the gauges with the exception of the plugs 100 mm, which suffer from an apparent change in length during the circulation. With the linking, inconsistent results gave a number of 12 out of 119 independent results for the diameter and 1 out of 21 for roundness of the sphere. The comparison results help to support the calibration and measurement capabilities (CMCs) of the laboratories, while recommendations and actions were agreed with those having inconsistent results. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database https://www.bipm.org/kcdb/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
Displacement rates of mountain slope deformations that can affect entire valley mountain flanks are often measured spatially distributed in‐situ without spatial significance. The spatially explicit measurement and recording of time series of slope deformations is a challenge, as the unstable slopes are often disintegrated into several subdomains, which move with different deformation rates. The current state‐of‐the‐art monitoring systems detect slow to very slow deformation rates between mm/a and several m/a. Using the examples of slope deformations in Saalbach‐Hinterglemm and the deep rock slide Marzellkamm in Austria this paper presents the results of terrestrial laser scans, extensometer measurements, Spaceborne InSAR data, unmanned Aerial System Photogrammetry (UAS‐P), and fixed‐point measurements. The different measurements complement each other and are optimally aligned for different application areas. InSAR data can help to identify hot spots on regional and local scale, while UAS‐P enables for spatially high level accuracy in the detection of subdomains moving at different speeds. For local warning systems TLS, extensometers and GBInSAR deliver higher accuracy.
The results of the inter-RMO key comparison EURAMET.L-K5.2016 on the calibration of a step gauge are reported. Twenty-two National Metrology Institutes from four different metrological regions all over the world participated in this comparison which lasted three years, from December 2015 to December 2018. Two artefacts were circulated so that the varying ranges of participants equipment could be accommodated. A 1020 mm ceramic monolithic step gauge remained stable throughout the comparison. A 610 mm steel step gauge changed length, possibly due to an impact while travelling between participants. The comparison of this artefact was divided into two groups, those before the damage and those after, with the reference value for each group derived from a linking participant who had demonstrated equivalence in the 1020 mm artefact circulation. For the 1020 mm comparison the inverse-variance weighted mean was taken as reference value. Of the twenty two participants, eleven successfully demonstrated the validity of the claimed measurement capability. Of the remaining 11, 3 submitted revised uncertainties after the initial circulation of results which were shown to be valid when compared to the reference value. A set of recommendations and actions were agreed with the remaining participants. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
